reusable surrogate missile targets...03 oct 2012 reusable surrogate missile targets presented by :...

03 Oct 2012

Reusable Surrogate Missile Targets

Presented by:

Geoffrey Babb Missile Airframe Simulation Testbed

(MAST) Project Lead U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research,

Development, and Engineering Center

Presented to:

NDIA Targets, UAVs & Range Operations Symposium

IAW DoD Directive 5230.24, this document is approved for public release. Distribution is unlimited.

2 FileName.pptx

Why Missiles?

Why Recoverability?

Application Space

MAST Tech Demo Project

Future Technology Path

3 FileName.pptx

• Blue – Nothing represents the shock, acceleration, and vibration environment of a missile

airframe. • Subsystems can be tested for failure inexpensively, and with recoverable results.

Why Missiles?

• Red – As we technology moves forward, our enemies grow more advanced. “We won’t be

fighting cave-dwellers forever.” • We have to keep up with the evolving threat world.

– MWS, IRCM, DIRCM, ASE suite, etc. are developed to counter the weapons of greatest threat.

• We have to test to the greatest threat. – Threat missiles are dynamic and their signatures require Open Air Range (OAR)

testing. • Signatures collected from static targets are unrealistic simulations; we need a

dynamic testbed to present real signatures.

4 FileName.pptx

• Sensor testing? First thought by many people is to run UUTs in traditional hardware-in-the-loop indoor environment.

– Signal injection: Useful for checking software & electronics hardware

– In-band radiation: Useful for characterizing optics and checking software & electronics hardware

– Upshot: great for testing functionality in a static physical environment with lots of repeatability

– Downshot: approximated scene, no acceleration/shock/vibration environment.

Why Missiles?

• Put it on an aircraft and fly it. – Aircraft with human pilot necessary for many of the

weight classes that need to be tested against. Airworthiness, and test planning are big hurdles.

– UAV flight is possible, but doesn’t represent the dynamics of rocket-powered flight; simulation fidelity is low, cost of a capable UAV and test prep is high.

5 FileName.pptx

• Reusable surrogate missiles are a testbed. • Provide greatest scene fidelity • Provide a closed-loop OAR scenario that can be carried out safely and

non-destructively. • Provides a new platform for R&D, D/OT&E, V&V.

HW/SW Testing Hierarchy

6 FileName.pptx

Why Missiles? E.g.: ASE

Threat Radiant Intensity (W•sr-1) - Amount of radiation emitted from a particular area within a given solid angle in a specific direction. Spectral Radiant Intensity (W•sr-1•µm-2). -A measurement of the threat’s emitted radiation in

the waveband of interest -Based on the spectral, spatial and temporal

signatures of the threat SRM

Perceived Threat Irradiance (W•m-2) - Amount of power per unit area incident on a surface (e.g., the MWS entrance aperture). Spectral Irradiance (W•m-2•µm-2). -A measurement of the ASE sensor’s measured power in the waveband of interest -Based on the threat SRM signature, range, relative geometry, atmospheric attenuation, solar loading,

reflections, optical heating, etc.

missilethreat toASEfromrangeslant(t)Rsensor ASEtheofresponsespectral(λλ)rmissiletoASEontransmissispectralt)(λλτ

threattheofintensityradiantsourcespectralt)(λλISensor ASEtheatirradiance spectralt)(λλE

(t)R(λλ)t)r(λλt)τ(λλIt)(λλE

SM

n

SM

M

s

2SM

nSMMs

=====

=

7 FileName.pptx

• No schedule slips due to unavailability of threat assets. – COST

• Retain on-board TM recordings to back up TM in case of RF interference or drop-out. – COST

• Keep missile targeted assets intact – COST

• Return any developmental hardware safely to developers – COST

• Retain for reuse the most expensive part of the missile: electronics & optics – COST

Why Recovery?

Impact on aerodynamics: Low Impact on test validity: Low Impact on cost of test asset: Low Impact on schedule: Low

8 FileName.pptx

Why Recoverability?

9 FileName.pptx

MAST Recoverable Seeker Technology Test Space

Hypersonic Subsonic Supersonic

Altit

ude

Helicopter - Captive Carry

Jet - Captive Carry - Flight Emulation

Missile (MAST) - Flight Emulation

Velocity

Recovery Vehicles

Jet Space

MAST Space

Recoverable Missile Airframe Simulation Testbed (MAST) Technology = Paradigm Shift

10 FileName.pptx

Reusable Surrogates for Missile Development Programs

Q3

CY 1

Q4 Q2 Q1 Q2 Q1

CY 2

Q4 Q3 Q2 Q1

CY 3

Q4 Q3

Planned Actual Possible With Recoverable Missile

Recoverable Missiles can condense Flight Testing, Significantly Reducing Development Costs and Schedule

CTV GTV

CTV GTV

CTV

Recoverable GTV

Flight Test

GTV

CTV – Control Flight Test (unguided airframe/control tests) GTV – Guided Flight Test

With Tactical Missile Airframe

With Tactical Seeker/Guidance Section On Recoverable Missile

Accelerated Flight Test Schedule - Parallel CTV and GTV - Quick Turn-Around Repetitive Tests - Non-Destructive Testing of Most Expensive Asset (Seeker/Guidance)

Typical Flight Test Schedule - Schedules are Expanded - Flight Tests are Reduced

11 FileName.pptx

• Missile Airframe Simulation Testbed, MANPADS formulation (MAST-M) is the first technology demonstration of a Reusable Surrogate Missile.

• Chosen for form factor and impending need expressed by a customer – Spinning airframe – Small Diameter

• Reusable electronics and GPS/IMU • Representative motor signature (spatial, temporal, spectral matching) • Scalable recovery system • Demonstration timeframe: Q3 FY13

Current Development

MAST-M LDS

POWER AVIONICS

CAS RECOVERY MOTOR

12 FileName.pptx

MAST Concept of Operations

Keep Out Zone

MAST carries missile subsystems in an Open Air Range (OAR) without damage to payloads

or high value assets in the air.

13 FileName.pptx

“Look Like a MANPADS” (Signature Matching) MAST must present accurate on-aperture UV and IR signatures to the ASE that closely match that of the threat MANPADS of interest for the eject, boost and sustain phases of flight.

• Presently, there are no missile surrogates that can match on-aperture signatures for ASE testing.

• The Challenge for MAST is to: – Match threat temporal thrust profile (eject, boost & sustain vs. time) – Match threat spectral signature in the UV and 2 color IR bands – Match threat signature spatial extent (size vs. time)

MAST Technology Challenges (1 of 3)

Development of Low Cost Surrogate Motors Opens Up OAR Test Possibilities

14 FileName.pptx

Signature Band of Interest Burn Comparison

Nov 2011

Jan 2011

15 FileName.pptx

“Fly Like a MANPADS” (Trajectory Matching) MAST Guidance, Navigation and Control (GNC) must fly a trajectory that matches that of the threat MANPADS of interest.

• Presently, there are no missile surrogates that can match threat trajectories.

• The Challenge for MAST is to: – Emulate the pro-nav intercept trajectory of the actual threat with a

surrogate of different size and GNC scheme – Provide an Guardian Autopilot to accurately compute missile

state, take control at a pre-programmed keep-out zone, and perform collision avoidance to insure non-destructive ASE testing

MAST Technology Challenges (2 of 3)

Development of Trajectory Matching GNC Allows Flight Emulation of Multiple Threats

16 FileName.pptx

DISAMS Versus G&C 6-DOF

Blue = G&C Red = DISAMS Green = Target

Current G&C 6-DOF flies a Threat-like Trajectory

17 FileName.pptx

“Fly it Again” (Safe Recovery) MAST must safely recover the payload in order to provide low cost, non-destructive ASE testing.

• Presently, there are no surrogate missiles that are recoverable.

• The Challenge for MAST is to: – Safely recover a high speed (mach 2+) missile payload – Recover the payload in a cost effective manner to reduce

refurbishment costs – Provide a reliable recovery system to allow safe testing of

valuable and hard to acquire threat assets as well as domestic subsystems.

MAST Technology Challenges (3 of 3)

Safe, Reliable, Cost Effective Missile Recovery Opens Up Many Other Test Use Cases

18 FileName.pptx

Separation Device Concept #1

Airframe

Shape Charge Advantages •Compact size •Reliable separation •Lightweight

•weight: 80 grams

Disadvantages •Fragmenting •Requires eSAF •High energy

12.5 grams of RDX = 52.3 Joules of Energy

19 FileName.pptx

Concept #1 Tested

20 FileName.pptx

Separation Device Concept #2

Advantages •Compact size •Inherent separation force •Lightweight

•weight: 97 grams

Disadvantages •Fragmenting bolt

Explosive Bolt Separation Clamp

.01 grams of RDX

.016 grams of Lead Azide

.078 grams TNT = 0.2409 Joules of Energy

MAST Missile Technology

21 FileName.pptx

Future Developments

22 FileName.pptx

Expanding Testing Capabilities

Recoverable Surrogate

Missile Technology

Missile Separation

Joint

Guardian Autopilot

Missile Recovery System

Payload Testing

Capability

Threat System

Simulation

Signature Replication Technology

Project Offices

Prime Contractors

DoD-Wide T&E

Support

Reusable Surrogate Missiles Support Current and Future Missile Engineering Processes and

Improves Final Products

23 FileName.pptx

Questions